PLAGIARISM
The OIA’s experience
Ruth Deech & Michael Reddy
1
The OIA Scheme
Some statistics
2
3
4
Complaints about plagiarism &
disciplinary offences
 Over
100 cases since April 2004
 About
one third involve plagiarism
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
The plagiarism case
 Student
was withdrawn from course after
being accused of plagiarism
 He alleged it was scientific collaboration
and he had misunderstood the permitted
amount
 He alleged the penalty was too harsh
13
Plagiarism decision
 Students
had been specifically warned
against plagiarism but he had not read the
Handbook
 Student had not raised queries with his
professor
 There was no evidence of collaboration
 The penalty was within the university’s
guidelines
 Complaint not justified
14
OIA & Plagiarism
 Impact
of plagiarism and determination are
issues of academic judgment
 Has the university applied its regulations
and followed its procedures?
 Is the decision by the university
reasonable in all the circumstances?
15
What is academic judgement?
“A decision about scholarship that only a suitably
experienced academic can make”
So decisions about whether plagiarism has
occurred and the assessment of plagiarised
work are matters of academic judgement
But the OIA will look at questions about fairness
and procedural irregularity
16
Academic offences





OIA will look at complaints about the university’s
academic offences procedures
Have they been followed properly, no material
breaches?
The more severe the punishment, the more
closely the procedures will be checked
Have they been applied fairly, not arbitrarily?
Do procedures comply with natural justice,
human rights and general consideration of
equity?
17
The forgery case
 Student
is achieving well in the third year
of his medical course
 The university discovers that he entered
with a forged degree certificate showing
better results than in truth he had achieved
 Following procedures, he is expelled
immediately
 He claims mitigating circumstances, that
the forgery was by his mother
18
Forgery decision
 The
procedures were properly followed
 The offence was serious enough to merit
instant expulsion
 Another student with better marks might
have taken the place; honesty is
paramount for doctors
 The mitigating circumstances were rightly
judged by the university to make no
difference
19
Fairness and penalties
 Provision
for mitigating circumstances
 Inconsistent application of penalties
 Reasons must be given by the university
 There must be provision for an appeal
20
Mitigating circumstances
 OIA unlikely
to interfere if they have been
properly considered
 Special care needs to be taken over
disability, mental health, misrepresentation
by university official, failure to explain
plagiarism to students, foreign students’
cultural issues
 Bereavement, health, stress, financial
problems, computer failure very common!
21
Mitigating circumstances
Are any mitigating circumstances acceptable in
deciding (a) whether the student has committed
the offence (b) the penalty?







Poor health?
Mental health?
Death of a relative?
Computer mishaps?
Financial difficulties?
Time pressures?
Cultural issues?
22
Procedural issues
justice – no bias, charge to be
known, both sides to be heard
 Bias is not prejudice, it is objective
 No financial conflicts
 No interested parties with previous
involvement
 Parity of representation
 Panel’s legal advice available to both
sides
 Natural
23
Principles of fairness
 University
must give adequate notice of
allegation
 Adequate hearing of both sides
 Appeal body must be and appear to be
unbiased
 Procedures should not be unreasonably
delayed
 Reasons for the decision necessary
24
Was the university’s decision fair?
•
Did the disciplinary panel consider the appropriate evidence?
•
What burden of proof is applicable?
•
Did the university observe natural justice?
•
Were the grounds of appeal reasonable?
•
Did the university properly consider mitigating circumstances?
•
Was the penalty proportionate to the offence?
•
Was the penalty consistent with other cases?
25
Relevance of other factors?

Extent of plagiarism?

Student “lulled to sleep” by inaction of university
Poor academic practices, such as failure to explain
what plagiarism is and/or the consequences


First year or final year?
 First offence?
 Deliberate, reckless, negligent or innocent?
 Consequences of punishment?
26
OIA remedies
 Reconsider
the complaint
 Hold a new hearing
 Change the penalty
 Offer an apology
 Expunge charge from the record
 Allow resubmission
 Pay compensation
 Reform university procedures
27
Learning from complaints about
disciplinary matters
Monitor – should have a reliable system of tracking
complaints, including time taken for each stage and
equal opportunities info. (QAA)
Review and evaluate – effectiveness of procedures,
adequacy of guidance & support, training of staff, deal
with common causes (QAA)
Report regularly to governing body about complaints
(QAA)
Seek feedback from students (BS ISO)
Publish information about complaints
(OIA)
28
New issues
 Are
we looking after our overseas
students?
 Language difficulties and cultural
background
 Relevance of mitigating circumstances
and their proof
 Previous similar cases
29